Page 281 - Week 01 - Thursday, 11 February 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
record and response to previous court orders, employment and personal circumstances, compliance with the intensive correction order assessment and the living circumstances of the offender. I should emphasise that it is not the intent of the bill to preclude offenders with, for example, alcohol or drug problems from receiving an intensive correction order but to take these matters into account.
There are serious considerations given to an offender’s living circumstances. This recognises the potential impact of an intensive correction order on other members of the household. Where a curfew condition is imposed, the bill’s provisions go further and require the consent of other members of the household, or their parent or guardian, to the offender living there. This acknowledges that obliging an offender to stay at an address for specified periods may create tensions within the household that may place family or other household members at risk.
The most fundamental element of this order will be the intensive level of supervision. Upon commencement of the order, offenders will be subject to close supervision. There will be multiple contacts with ACT Corrective Services every week, including home visits and visits to workplaces. There will be frequent meetings with corrections officers, drug testing at least once a week where there are substance abuse issues and the imposition of curfews. ACT offenders will find the intensive correction order unlike any community order they have ever seen. It will challenge them, and it will be tough to complete. And that is the point, because in meeting the requirements of the order, they will need to change the way they are living their lives.
This new sentence is designed to allow all aspects, including the punitive and rehabilitative elements, to take effect immediately and will, except for limited circumstances, not allow for combination sentences. It would be difficult to rationalise another sentence following on from an intensive correction order as either the order would have been completed successfully, and so there would be no real purpose in a further subsequent sentence, or the order would not have been completed, with inevitable consequences for the offender.
Breach of the intensive correction order is a notable difference from other sentences. Emerging evidence from overseas jurisdictions is moving towards a “swift, certain, sure but proportionate” approach to breaches which has proved very promising in reducing rates of reoffending. The approach sees offenders who have breached their order being taken to court within a very short time frame and receiving a short period in custody to mark the breach before being released to complete the order. Dealing with an offender who breaches an order without delay ensures a clear connection between the breach and the consequences and serves to reinforce the importance of compliance in the mind of the offender.
The breach process for the intensive correction order is underpinned by this thinking in what is a real innovation for the territory. The processes to bring offenders before the Sentence Administration Board will be streamlined to ensure as short a delay as possible in the hearing and consideration of an allegation that the order has been breached. Once a breach has been proved the Sentence Administration Board has new options to mark the breach. This includes imposing three days imprisonment where a breach is admitted by an offender, but seven days if the breach is denied but is then
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video